Re: [aqm] status of codel WGLC

Thanks Wes. We'll work on getting -03 out shortly.

- jana

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> wrote:

> Hi, in December, we started a working group last call on:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-codel/
> (the -02 version of the document)
>
> A couple of small comments that I've seen since then, but don't think were
> addressed are in:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/aqm/0NM0D2PtrF08XzTk5M9TLkkybyc
>
> I think based on Dave's responses in that thread, they might be easy to
> address with simple editorial changes, but would like the editors to
> respond or post an update.
>
> Also, the editors should take a quick look at the "idnits" output and fix
> a few errors/warnings (which should be easy):
>
> https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-aqm-codel-02.txt
> - need a table of contents
> - check the references
>
> I didn't see any feedback about document publication tracks (e.g.
> Standards Track, Informational, Experimental, etc).  We talked to the ADs
> briefly about this, and I think we are comfortable with Experimental for
> this document.  That is the appropriate track if the AQM working group
> thinks this is safe to deploy widely while experimenting with on the
> Internet (which has been happening for quite some time already).  So, I
> think version -04 should be labelled with "Intended Status: Experimental".
>
> My plan is to complete the shepherd writeup for this document in the next
> couple weeks, and if the editors push the -03 version of the draft, I think
> it will be ready to proceed for AD review.
>
> Please shout if you have further comments.
>
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
>